That's Interference!

[charliej47]

I try to enforce the rules as written as I understand them. The runner was protected to her at least her next base which was 3rd.

It she had tried home and there had been a close call, She would have been safe under my understanding.

The fact that the coach chose to hold her on 3rd was the coach's decision.

[Manny A]

Originally Posted by charliej47

I try to enforce the rules as written as I understand them. The runner was protected to her at least her next base which was 3rd.

It she had tried home and there had been a close call, She would have been safe under my understanding.

The fact that the coach chose to hold her on 3rd was the coach's decision.

So suppose you judged she would have made it to home, and when you announce the award, the coach at third wants to keep her there. WWYD?

[EsqUmp]

Just give the runners the damn bases they would have reached IN YOUR JUDGMENT had there been no obstruction.

Here is some food for though. Every second an average runner is impeded she loses at least 20 feet running. So if this runner was delayed for 2 seconds, ask yourself if you had given her 40 feet, would she have scored.

[MD Longhorn]

Originally Posted by charliej47

I try to enforce the rules as written as I understand them. The runner was protected to her at least her next base which was 3rd.

It she had tried home and there had been a close call, She would have been safe under my understanding.

The fact that the coach chose to hold her on 3rd was the coach's decision.

Yuck.

Please review this rule. Your enforcement is not correct. An obstructed runner does NOT have to attempt to reach the awarded base in order to be awarded that base.

If you were my umpire, and I was a coach - I would have my first baseman bearhug every hitter that hit an apparent triple or homer, and continue to hold her in front of first base. You would award first... after all, she didn't even try for second, right?

[Andy]

Originally Posted by charliej47

I try to enforce the rules as written as I understand them. The runner was protected to her at least her next base which was 3rd.

It she had tried home and there had been a close call, She would have been safe under my understanding.

The fact that the coach chose to hold her on 3rd was the coach's decision.

With obstruction, don't wait until the play is over to determine the award. Start making that decision at the time of the obstruction and stick to it. If you and your partner determined at the time of the obstruction, the award was to be home, that is the award you should make a the end of the play.

Waiting until the end of the play could bring too many more factors into play.

[Manny A]

Originally Posted by Andy

With obstruction, don't wait until the play is over to determine the award. Start making that decision at the time of the obstruction and stick to it. If you and your partner determined at the time of the obstruction, the award was to be home, that is the award you should make a the end of the play.

Waiting until the end of the play could bring too many more factors into play.

Is there no such animal as post-obstruction evidence in softball?

Ground ball base hit to the outfield. BR is slightly hindered by F3 rounding first, and you immediately decide she probably wouldn't get second. But then F8 muffs the ball and it goes toward the fence. BR is thrown out at third on a close play. Are you going to rule her out since you probably wouldn't have even protected her to second, much less third?

[teebob21]

Originally Posted by Manny A

Ground ball base hit to the outfield. BR is slightly hindered by F3 rounding first, and you immediately decide she probably wouldn't get second. But then F8 muffs the ball and it goes toward the fence. BR is thrown out at third on a close play. Are you going to rule her out since you probably wouldn't have even protected her to second, much less third?

Yes, probably without a second thought. In fact, I made a similar call this weekend. BR hits a "likely double", and was obstructed near 1B. The cutoff throw from F9 was a weak duck, and BR tried to leg it out to 3B. OUUUUUUUUT on a laser beam toss from F4. There is no way the original hit was a triple; I was not protecting her to third.

[UmpireErnie]

Originally Posted by Manny A

Is there no such animal as post-obstruction evidence in softball?

Ground ball base hit to the outfield. BR is slightly hindered by F3 rounding first, and you immediately decide she probably wouldn't get second. But then F8 muffs the ball and it goes toward the fence. BR is thrown out at third on a close play. Are you going to rule her out since you probably wouldn't have even protected her to second, much less third?

IMO when you call OBS you should make an initial decision where to protect the runner to. The nice thing is you don't announce that decision to the rest of the world just yet so if presented with compelling evidence as the play progresses you can change your initial decision.

In your play I very possibly would have made an initial decision that BR was not going past 1B but then seeing how fast she is rounding 2B realize my initial decision was wrong and make the protection 2B. I'm not adding to the award based on F8 muffing the ball, that has nothing to do with the OBS.

Regardless I need to have a firm decision made prior to the play being made on the obstructed BR so I can be ready to handle that call properly. As I see this play in my mind based on your description I doubt I would have protected to 3B it does not sound like she hit a clean triple; frankly those are rare. So all I have is normal safe/out call. But let's say I had protected to 3B now on the tag my call is "Dead Ball!" followed by the award of 3B. If I'm still busy deciding where to protect BR I have a better than average chance of botching the call at 3B either with bad decision or bad mechanics.

[Andy]

Originally Posted by Manny A

Is there no such animal as post-obstruction evidence in softball?

Ground ball base hit to the outfield. BR is slightly hindered by F3 rounding first, and you immediately decide she probably wouldn't get second. But then F8 muffs the ball and it goes toward the fence. BR is thrown out at third on a close play. Are you going to rule her out since you probably wouldn't have even protected her to second, much less third?

Thank you for proving my point.

The misplay by F8 is a susequent play and has nothing to do with the obstruction. If my initial decision is that she was not going to make second, her protection is between first and second and if she is put out (absent any of the exceptions) between those bases, I'm awarding her first base. Once she advances beyond second base, she is on her own...she is attempting to advance based on the misplay and, in my judgement, would not have made third base if not obstructed.

[AtlUmpSteve]

Originally Posted by Manny A

Is there no such animal as post-obstruction evidence in softball?

Ground ball base hit to the outfield. BR is slightly hindered by F3 rounding first, and you immediately decide she probably wouldn't get second. But then F8 muffs the ball and it goes toward the fence. BR is thrown out at third on a close play. Are you going to rule her out since you probably wouldn't have even protected her to second, much less third?

Exactly; there is not. You make an initial judgment based solely on the basis of the play at the time of the obstruction, and you ignore subsequent alternate actions that aren't related to the obstruction.

[IRISHMAFIA]

Originally Posted by AtlUmpSteve

Exactly; there is not. You make an initial judgment based solely on the basis of the play at the time of the obstruction, and you ignore subsequent alternate actions that aren't related to the obstruction.

Well, maybe. I would be more specific as to state you do not alter an award based on subsequent play.

For example, BR/R rounding 1B and runs into Moose watching F9 move to cut-off the bounding ball. BU thinking, "okay, this isn't deep, 2B" as runner regains his/her balance and heads toward 2B. However, F9 doesn't quite get in position in time to cut off the ball and it looks like the runner can reach 3B as F9 is gets to the ball.

Not a problem, now throw just beats the runner to 3B, but gets by F5. Runner jumps up and tries to score. The ball kicks back strong off the fence to F5 who just gets the runner out at the plate.

I have no problem with an umpire hesitating/adjusting the award at the top of the action. However, once the defense gains position of the BATTER ball that is where I prefer they lock in the location at that point.

Remember, OBS is just supposed to bring the playing field back to a level after the OBS. That point was reached when the runner reached 3B safely.

[Manny A]

Originally Posted by IRISHMAFIA

Well, maybe. I would be more specific as to state you do not alter an award based on subsequent play.

For example, BR/R rounding 1B and runs into Moose watching F9 move to cut-off the bounding ball. BU thinking, "okay, this isn't deep, 2B" as runner regains his/her balance and heads toward 2B. However, F9 doesn't quite get in position in time to cut off the ball and it looks like the runner can reach 3B as F9 is gets to the ball.

Not a problem, now throw just beats the runner to 3B, but gets by F5. Runner jumps up and tries to score. The ball kicks back strong off the fence to F5 who just gets the runner out at the plate.

I have no problem with an umpire hesitating/adjusting the award at the top of the action. However, once the defense gains position of the BATTER ball that is where I prefer they lock in the location at that point.

Remember, OBS is just supposed to bring the playing field back to a level after the OBS. That point was reached when the runner reached 3B safely.

I have no problem with your example, and that's how I would rule. I would initially protect the BR to second, but then adjust that protection to third after F9 fails to cut off the ball adequately, allowing the BR to try for third. Once she reaches third safely on the play and the ball gets away from F5, she's on her own, since the obstruction had no bearing on her attempt to score.

Apparently others argue that the BR loses her protection after she rounds second and heads for third, since they would not change what they determined was her protection immediately upon the obstruction taking place.

[tcannizzo]

I am confused on the definition of "subsequent play".

[Manny A]

Originally Posted by AtlUmpSteve

Exactly; there is not. You make an initial judgment based solely on the basis of the play at the time of the obstruction, and you ignore subsequent alternate actions that aren't related to the obstruction.

Well, to me, that goes complete 180 against the "will be awarded the base or bases which would have been reached, in the umpire's judgment, had there been no obstruction" application.

You're essentially saying that a runner could get different protection based upon when the outfielder muffs the play. If the obstruction happens before the ball rolls through F8's legs, she gets protected only to first base, but if the obstruction happens after F8 muffs it, she gets protected to third. That doesn't make sense to me. And, frankly, I don't see how a base umpire can watch to determine the status of the fielder and ball the moment the runner is obstructed.

[HugoTafurst]

I may always have looked at this wrong, BUT, I have looked at judging the base she would have gotten absent the obstruction more by judging how much I believe the player lost due to the obstruction.
In other words, brief contact rounding first or being denied the inside of first base while rounding, then getting thrown out by only a few steps. I would award her 2nd base, but if she continued (without hesitation) on to 3rd and was still thrown out by those same few steps, I would award her third.

If she were thrown out at 2nd by more than the few steps I judged the obstruction caused, I'd send her back to first.

If she were thrown out at 3rd by more than the few steps I judged the obstruction caused, she would be out.

Also if she stopped (or hesitated) at second on her way to third, I also would have no protection for her.